Childcare professional all over the world, have always put the interests of the child first, more so when it comes to ‘physical abuse and risk to life’(Hagan, 2006 pg 24). They are right to be so, since, child safeguarding and protection are more of a right than a necessity. Safeguarding covers the aspects of a child spanning from early life to maturity. Safeguarding focuses on the development, factoring potential risks and vulnerabilities while cultivating an atmosphere ‘focused on children as future citizens’ (Parton, 2011 pg 856 – 857). Child protection is quite essential in its own respect, however, safeguarding outweighs protection since it is curative preventive rather than curative. Cleaver et al., (2009 pg 13) firmly insists that children should be put at the center of the safeguarding process.
Parton’s (2011) study purposed to shed light on policy development and debate in England, in relation to child protection and safeguarding. He lays emphasis on the significant change in policy over the years. By having this article published by the British Journal of Social Work, with the authority and command it bears in this field, the article asserts it strength and relevance. It is, however, not enough to vouch for an article based on who, or where it featured; there is the need for further scrutiny and research by all stakeholders. This helps influence practice and even policy. In this essay, therefore, I will critically aim at analysing Parton’s article, giving a summary and a critique thereof.
Parton’s main purpose was to reflect in a critical way, the developments in policy, as well as debates in England in matters of child protection and safeguarding (Parton, 2011). By emphasizing on policy changes in a span of 20 years, he aimed at putting the state on the spotlight in matters of its contribution to this change. The researcher neither portrays the state as having failed in matters of policy development, nor does he